On Fri, Oct 01, 2004 at 06:43:42AM +0100, Matt Clark wrote: > > >If you're not using a connection pool of some kind then you might as > >well forget query plan caching, because your connect overhead will swamp > >the planning cost. This does not mean you have to use something like > >pgpool (which makes some rather questionable claims IMO); any decent web > >application language/environment will support connection pooling. > > > > > Hmm, a question of definition - there's a difference between a pool and > a persistent connection. Pretty much all web apps have one connection > per process, which is persistent (i.e. not dropped and remade for each > request), but not shared between processes, therefore not pooled.
OK, that'd work too... the point is if you're re-connecting all the time it doesn't really matter what else you do for performance. -- Jim C. Nasby, Database Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828 Windows: "Where do you want to go today?" Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?" FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?" ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
